Excuse me for double asking, but is this the place for such a feature request? Thanks in advance for your help/time. В Птн, 26/01/2007 в 13:21 +0200, Покотиленко Костик пишет: > Hi. > > After analizing the situation I have come to decide to request NEW TABLE > in iptables. > > Considering the scheme at: > > http://www.meteor.dp.ua/casper/firewill.pdf > > how would I make a "feature request" to ask for, say, "mangle2" table > that is just after "nat" in POSTROUTING? The only reason for this move > is the need for ability to catch un-DNAT'ed packets with -j ULOG or > (better) to -j QUEUE. > > В Вто, 26/12/2006 в 12:09 +0100, Pascal Hambourg пишет: > > Hello, > > > > Pokotilenko Kostik a écrit : > > > > > > Is it possible to catch un-DNAT'ed packets with iptables' -j ULOG > > > target? > > > > I'm afraid no. > > > > > Where does the un-DNAT occurs and is there table/chain that is > > > processed after un-DNAT? > > > > In 2.4 kernels, when DNAT occurs in the PREROUTING chain, un-DNAT occurs > > at the same place as (and in place of) the POSTROUTING chain of the > > 'nat' table, and there is no chain after it. In 2.4 kernels >= 2.4.19, > > when DNAT occurs in the OUTPUT chain, un-DNAT occurs after the INPUT > > chain of the 'filter' table, and there is no chain after it either. I > > suppose it has not changed in 2.6 kernels. > > > > > The problem I have is that replay packets got catched with real source > > > address, not the one the client has initially connected to. I was > > > catching replay packets in mangle/POSTROUTING. > > > > The POSTROUTING chain of the 'mangle' table is just before the un-DNAT > > place. > > > > -- Покотиленко Костик <casper@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
